Noise and kerbside glass collection

1
Noise and kerbside glass collection

• Tim Ward
• HM Principal Specialist Inspector (Noise
  Vibration)

2
Overview

• Background
• Levels of noise exposure found
• (and consequences for employers)
• Understanding the problem
• Personal hearing protection
• The way forward

3
Background

• Noise raised as issue by HSE inspector carrying
  out audits of LA waste collection
• Two LAs visited to provide advice on compliance
  with Noise regulations, including making estimate
  of noise exposure
• Exposures found to be high (1) LEP,d 96-100 dB,
  (2) LEP,d 91-92 dB
• Poor compliance with requirements on noise
  exposure control and hearing protection
• Decided issue needed further investigation

4
(No Transcript)
5
Current knowledge of noise risks

• Kerbsider collection vehicle. Glass only, no
  sorting
• LEP,d 96-100 dB, Maximum LCpeak 125 dB
• 340 1000 crates per collector per day. Rapid
  working observed
• Kerbsider collection vehicle. Glass only,
  collected to slave wheelie bins, no sorting
• LEP,d 91-92 dB, Maximum LCpeak 137 dB
• 200 250 crates per collector per day. Operator
  technique varied
• Kerbsider collection vehicle. Glass only,
  sorted at skip
• LEP,d 97 dB, Maximum LCpeak 143 dB
• 166 crates per collector per day

6
Current knowledge of noise risks

• Kerbsider collection vehicle. Glass, plastic
  and cans collected together. Sorted at vehicle
• LEP,d 83 dB, Maximum LCpeak 135 dB
• Kerbsider collection vehicle. Glass, plastic,
  cans, paper collected together. Sorted at vehicle
• LEP,d 91-92 dB, Max LCpeak 133 dB
• (No information on working method)
• LEP,d 94 dB, Maximum LCpeak 131 dB
• Estimated 340 crates per collector per shift

7
Current knowledge of noise risks

• (No information on working method)
• LEP,d 86 dB
• From dutyholders noise assessment
• Collection and sorting at in-vehicle stillages
• LEP,d 87 dB, Maximum LCpeak 134 dB
• Consultants report
• Collecting the glass recycling receptacles and
  placing them in the bin lift and then allowing it
  to empty in the hopper
• LEP,d 106 dB, Maximum LCpeak 138 dB
• Dutyholders noise assessment

8
Consequences of evident noise risks

• Noise exposures exceed 85 dB upper action value,
  under Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005
  employers should
• Eliminate risk from noise, or reduce to as low as
  reasonably practicable (ALARP)
• Reduce exposure to ALARP (technical/organisational
  means, not hearing protection)
• Take immediate action to reduce exposure below 87
  dB exposure limit (hearing protection allowed)
• Provide hearing protection, ensure it is worn
  when required
• Health surveillance for exposed employees
• Information, instruction and training for
  employees

9
Initial thoughts

• Large range of noise exposure, factors could
  include
• Working practices, e.g.
• Speed
• operatives
• Collection/sorting method, e.g.
• mixed/single waste type
• sort/no sort at vehicle
• type of vehicle

10
Understanding the problem

• Trials carried out under controlled conditions
• Filling technique
• Trough lining (polyurethane)
• Source of noise glass-trough or glass-glass
• Carried out at premises of Terberg Matec Ltd.,
  Worksop

11
Understanding the problem

• Emerging findings from trials at Terberg
• Rapid tip is worst technique, polyurethane lining
  makes no difference
• Single bottle (sorting) as noisy as rapid tip,
  polyurethane lining reduces by 1-2 dB
• Slower/controlled tip is quietest, polyurethane
  lining reduces by further 2 dB
• Airborne glass-glass noise dominates

12
Who needs a noise control engineer?

• One Borough Council reports success in modifying
  collection vehicle
• Troughs lined with astroturf underlay
• Hinged flap over aperture
• 4-5 dB reduction in exposure achieved

13
(No Transcript)
14
Initial thoughts on solutions

• Noise exposures likely to be reduced by
  considering, in combination
• Good practice working methods
• e.g. operator technique, task rotation
• Good practice collection/sorting methods
• mixed collections, collection methods, sorting
  methods (where, when)
• Vehicle / collection system design
• Machinery designed to minimise noise emissions
  during foreseeable use, information on residual
  risk and safe use provided (Supply of Machinery
  (Safety) Regulations 1992)

15
Personal hearing protection

• Needed where exposures exceed 85 dB (daily
  exposure) or 137 dB (peak)
• Limit values are being exceeded in some cases
  so either use hearing protection, modify the
  work, or cease the work!
• Hearing protection can cause additional risks
  when working around moving vehicles/highways
• Communications
• Warning signals
• Isolation

16
Considerations on hearing protection

• Organise work so that need to wear hearing
  protection in higher safety risk situations is
  eliminated
• Target hearing protection at noisy activities
  only (dont require it to be worn all day)
• Consider and select appropriate hearing
  protection
• Organise work to allow employees to don/doff
  hearing protection as necessary
• Systems of work/information, instruction and
  training/supervision/monitoring
• Hearing can must be protected

17
Types of hearing protection

• Amplitude dependent earmuffs/plugs
• Electronic (usually)
• Allow passage of lower level sounds, cut-out
  higher level sounds - e.g. short duration impact
  sounds
• e.g. 3M 1520/1525, Sordin-MSA Basic line Cut-off,
  Peltor Tactical, JSP Classic Electronic, Bilsom
  Impact, EAR Ultra 9000 (non-electronic), EAR
  Combat Arms (plug, non-electronic)

18
Types of hearing protection

• Flat attenuation earmuffs/earplugs
• aim minimise distortion of sounds, decrease the
  sense of isolation and generally allow wearer to
  distinguish important sounds and warning signals
• e.g. Bilsom NST Clarity (earmuffs), EAR Ultratech
  (earplugs)

19
The way forward

• Immediate action
• Employees hearing at risk now - protect it as
  required by regulations
• WISH Glass Collection Noise working group
  constituted
• identify what constitutes good practice, and
  practicalities sharing of experience
• HSE will continue to work with the industry to
  identify means to reduce noise exposure quick
  fixes and longer-term
• Noise exposure must be played in when decisions
  are made on recycling collection strategies